Adalimumab Biosimilar PF-06410293 versus Reference Adalimumab in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe, Active Rheumatoid Arthritis

2020 Year in Review - Biosimilars

Longer-term follow-up supports earlier evidence that treatment switch from adalimumab-EU to PF-06410293 does not impact treatment safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe, active rheumatoid arthritis.

A randomized, double-blind, comparative clinical trial (NCT02480153) evaluated the long-term safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of the adalimumab biosimilar, PF-06410293 (ADL-PF), in patients with moderate-to-severe, active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who continued ADL-PF treatment throughout 78 weeks or who switched from reference adalimumab sourced from the European Union (adalimumab-EU) to ADL-PF at week 26 or week 52. The results from Treatment Period 3 (TP3; weeks 52-92) were presented at the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Convergence 2020 meeting.

Included in the study were patients who met 2010 ACR/European League Against Rheumatism RA diagnosis criteria for ≥4 months, had an inadequate response to methotrexate, and had received ≤2 doses of 1 lymphocyte-depleting or non-adalimumab biologic. The treatment sequence was in 3 stages. In Treatment Period 1 (TP1), eligible patients were randomized to receive ADL-PF or adalimumab-EU (40 mg subcutaneously every other week) with methotrexate; stratification was by geographic regions. At the start of Treatment Period 2 (TP2; week 26), patients who received adalimumab-EU were re-randomized to either continue adalimumab-EU or switch to ADL-PF for an additional 26 weeks. At the start of TP3 (week 52), all patients received open-label ADL-PF for an additional 26 weeks. The primary end point was ≥20% clinical improvement of ACR criteria (ACR20, a composite measure defined as both improvement of 20% in the number of tender and swollen joints, and a 20% improvement in 3 of the following 5 criteria: patient global assessment, physician global assessment, functional ability measure [most often Health Assessment Questionnaire], visual analog pain scale, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate or C-reactive protein [CRP]) at week 12; secondary efficacy end points included ACR20 at other time points and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints comprising 4 variables based on high-sensitivity CRP (DAS28-4 CRP). Response assessment was done in 3 groups corresponding to the treatment sequence (ie, biosimilar randomization, week 26 switch, and week 52 switch).

A total of 597 patients were randomized in TP1; of these, 552 continued to TP2 at week 26, and 507 received open-label ADL-PF in TP3. In the TP3 study population, the majority of patients were female (78.1%) and white (86.6%). Overall, ACR20 response rates and DAS28-4 CRP scores were comparable across groups and were maintained from previous treatment periods.

The safety profiles were comparable across groups. During TP3 and the 16-week follow-up period, the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) was 42.6% in the biosimilar cohort, 37.0% in the week 26 switch cohort, and 50.8% in the week 52 switch cohort. Overall, 3 treatment-related serious AEs were reported, all in the week 52 switch group; 1 death occurred in the week 52 switch group.

Also during TP3 or the follow-up period, among patients who tested negative for antidrug antibodies (ADAs) on entry to TP3, incidence rates of ADAs were 8.9%, 6.3%, and 8.3% for the biosimilar, week 26 switch, and week 52 switch groups, respectively; overall, incidences of patients with ADAs in TP3 and the follow-up period were comparable among groups (46.1%, 46.5%, and 54.2%, respectively).

These results from TP3 and the follow-up period demonstrated no clinically meaningful differences in safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy among treatment groups, which was consistent with earlier findings from this study, indicating that treatment switch from adalimumab-EU to ADL-PF did not impact treatment outcomes.

Reference
Fleischmann R, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020;72(suppl 10):Abstract 798.

Related Items

Beyond the Jargon: Explaining Biosimilars to Patients
By Sharon S. Gentry, MSN, RN, HON-ONN-CG, AOCN, CBCN
March 2025 Vol 16, No 3
As biosimilars increase in the care arena of cancer treatment, it is critical that patients be informed of this classification of treatment in a way that allows for shared decision-making.
Panel: Biosimilar Adoption Dependent on Various Stakeholder Economics
January 2022 Vol 13, No 1
Thirty-one biosimilar products have been approved by the FDA, 20 of which have been launched in the United States.
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of the Bevacizumab Biosimilar MIL60 versus Bevacizumab Reference in Patients with Advanced or Recurrent Nonsquamous NSCLC
2021 Year in Review - Biosimilars
The results of a randomized, double-blind phase 3 study established the equivalence of bevacizumab reference to its biosimilar MIL60 in terms of clinical efficacy, safety, population pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC.
Journal of Oncology Navigation & Survivorship
JONS

Subscribe Today!

To sign up for our print publication or e-newsletter, please enter your contact information below.

I'd like to receive:

  • First Name *
    Last Name *
     
    Profession or Role
    Primary Specialty or Disease State
    Country